[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAD=FV=X7FnrwHSedA=1xJsrfSgQZcqu0YEAKrfoJC6BhDc-gFA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2022 10:14:36 -0700
From: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To: Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>
Cc: Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>, MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] locking/rwsem: Make handoff bit handling more consistent
Hi,
On Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 5:17 PM Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 22 Jul 2022 07:02:42 -0700 Doug Anderson wrote:
> >
> > Thanks! I added this diff to your previous diff and my simple test
> > still passes and I don't see your WARN_ON triggered.
>
> Thanks!
> >
> > How do we move forward? Are you going to officially submit a patch
> > with both of your diffs squashed together? Are we waiting for
> > additional review from someone?
>
> Given it is not unusual for us to miss anything important, lets take
> a RWSEM_WAIT_TIMEOUT nap now or two.
It appears that another fix has landed in the meantime. Commit
6eebd5fb2083 ("locking/rwsem: Allow slowpath writer to ignore handoff
bit if not set by first waiter").
...unfortunately with that patch my test cases still hangs. :(
Powered by blists - more mailing lists